Information Propagation on Permissionless Blockchains

Blockchain technology, as a decentralized and non-hierarchical platform, has the potential to replace centralized systems. Yet, there are several challenges inherent in the blockchain structure. One of the deficiencies of the existing blockchains is a convenient information propagation technique enhancing incentive-compatibility and bandwidth efficiency. The transition from a centralized system into distributed one brings along game theoretical concerns. Especially for the permissionless blockchains, information propagation should be incentive-compatible just like any other communication or computational costly operation. Another important issue is that information is relayed via gossip-like protocols causing excessive bandwidth usage. Each information is propagated at least twice: first to advertise its existence, second to announce that it is final and validated, i.e., added to the block. In this work, we investigate two distinct aspects of the information propagation of the blockchains: incentive and routing mechanisms. For the former part, we analyze the necessary and sufficient conditions of the Sybil-proof incentive-compatible propagation methodology. We show the impossibility result of the Sybil-proofness in 1-connected network model. For the rest, we prove that the propagation decision is independent of the capabilities of the receiving side. Then, we formulate the generic fee sharing function which encourages rational participants to propagate information. Regarding the bandwidth efficiency, we study a special type of consensus protocols where the block owner (round leader) is validated before the block is created. We present a smart routing mechanism which the redundant communication cost from the size of the network to the scale of average shortest path length. Finally, we combine the incentive and routing mechanisms in a storage-efficient way.

[1]  Hannes Hartenstein,et al.  Timing Analysis for Inferring the Topology of the Bitcoin Peer-to-Peer Network , 2016, 2016 Intl IEEE Conferences on Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Advanced and Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing and Communications, Cloud and Big Data Computing, Internet of People, and Smart World Congress (UIC/ATC/ScalCom/CBDCom/IoP/SmartWorld).

[2]  Ariel Gabizon,et al.  Cryptocurrencies Without Proof of Work , 2014, Financial Cryptography Workshops.

[3]  Gareth W. Peters,et al.  Understanding Modern Banking Ledgers Through Blockchain Technologies: Future of Transaction Processing and Smart Contracts on the Internet of Money , 2015, ArXiv.

[4]  Eytan Adar,et al.  Free Riding on Gnutella , 2000, First Monday.

[5]  Lisa Fleischer,et al.  Simple sybil-proof mechanisms for multi-level marketing , 2012, INFOCOM Workshops.

[6]  Alex Biryukov,et al.  Deanonymisation of Clients in Bitcoin P2P Network , 2014, CCS.

[7]  Pramod Viswanath,et al.  Dandelion: Redesigning the Bitcoin Network for Anonymity , 2017, Proc. ACM Meas. Anal. Comput. Syst..

[8]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Statistical mechanics of complex networks , 2001, ArXiv.

[9]  Pramod Viswanath,et al.  Deanonymization in the Bitcoin P2P Network , 2017, NIPS.

[10]  Agata Fronczak,et al.  Average path length in random networks. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[11]  Kerem Kaskaloglu,et al.  Near Zero Bitcoin Transaction Fees Cannot Last Forever , 2014 .

[12]  Kartik Nayak,et al.  Solidus: An Incentive-compatible Cryptocurrency Based on Permissionless Byzantine Consensus , 2016, ArXiv.

[13]  Elaine Shi,et al.  Nonoutsourceable Scratch-Off Puzzles to Discourage Bitcoin Mining Coalitions , 2015, CCS.

[14]  Sunny King,et al.  PPCoin: Peer-to-Peer Crypto-Currency with Proof-of-Stake , 2012 .

[15]  Aggelos Kiayias,et al.  Ouroboros: A Provably Secure Proof-of-Stake Blockchain Protocol , 2017, CRYPTO.

[16]  Martí Berini Sarrias Bitcoin network simulator data explotation , 2015 .

[17]  Ethan Heilman,et al.  Eclipse Attacks on Bitcoin's Peer-to-Peer Network , 2015, USENIX Security Symposium.

[18]  Bin Yu,et al.  An incentive mechanism for message relaying in unstructured peer-to-peer systems , 2009, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[19]  P. Erdos,et al.  On the evolution of random graphs , 1984 .

[20]  Moshe Tennenholtz,et al.  Mechanisms for multi-level marketing , 2011, EC '11.

[21]  Joshua A. Kroll,et al.  The Economics of Bitcoin Mining, or Bitcoin in the Presence of Adversaries , 2013 .

[22]  Emin Gün Sirer,et al.  Majority Is Not Enough: Bitcoin Mining Is Vulnerable , 2013, Financial Cryptography.

[23]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Rationality and Self-Interest in Peer to Peer Networks , 2003, IPTPS.

[24]  Moshe Tennenholtz,et al.  Distributed Games: From Mechanisms to Protocols , 1999, AAAI/IAAI.

[25]  Daniel Davis Wood,et al.  ETHEREUM: A SECURE DECENTRALISED GENERALISED TRANSACTION LEDGER , 2014 .

[26]  Sharon L. Milgram,et al.  The Small World Problem , 1967 .

[27]  Emin Gün Sirer,et al.  Bitcoin-NG: A Scalable Blockchain Protocol , 2015, NSDI.

[28]  Stefan Dziembowski,et al.  Proofs of Space , 2015, CRYPTO.

[29]  Prabhakar Raghavan Query Incentive Networks , 2005, ASIAN.

[30]  Ghassan O. Karame,et al.  Is Bitcoin a Decentralized Currency? , 2014, IEEE Security & Privacy.

[31]  Iddo Bentov,et al.  Proof of Activity: Extending Bitcoin's Proof of Work via Proof of Stake [Extended Abstract]y , 2014, PERV.

[32]  Laurent Vanbever,et al.  Hijacking Bitcoin: Routing Attacks on Cryptocurrencies , 2016, 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP).

[33]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  The Byzantine Generals Problem , 1982, TOPL.

[34]  Patrick D. McDaniel,et al.  An Analysis of Anonymity in Bitcoin Using P2P Network Traffic , 2014, Financial Cryptography.

[35]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein,et al.  Bitcoin Mining Pools: A Cooperative Game Theoretic Analysis , 2015, AAMAS.

[36]  B. Huberman,et al.  Social Dilemmas and Internet Congestions , 1997 .